Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Wetcoaster

Ethiopian Women Claim Israel Forced Them To Accept Birth Control Shots

Recommended Posts

It is hard to fathom that a people who went through the Holocaust with its medical experimentation and medical treatment done without consent could countenance such a program and with a controversial drug with the known side effects of Depo-Provera.

The allegations have been made in the past but until now have been denied by the Israeli government.

http://rt.com/news/e...ve-infertility/

A recent TV news investigation report in Israel uncovered more evidence of the injection of Ethiopian women. The report alleged that Ethiopian immigrant women have been coerced into taking contraceptive shots, which is behind a 50 percent decline in the Ethiopian birth rate in Israel over the last decade.

http://blogs.forward.com/sisterhood-blog/167445/shocking-decline-in-ethiopian-israeli-birthrate/

An Israeli government official has acknowledged that a number of Ethiopian women who were immigrating to Israel were injected with a long-acting contraceptive without understanding the consequences of the treatment.

Haaretz reports that Health Ministry Director General Prof. Ron Gamzu banned Israel's health maintenance organizations from injecting Ethiopian women with the contraceptive Depo-Provera "if for any reason there is concern that they might not understand the ramifications of the treatment.”

Reports of forced birth control shots have been around for years, but government officials had always denied the practice. A documentary that aired in December on Israel's Educational Network also shed new light on the reports.

Haaretz wrote in December that 35 Ethiopian women who immigrated to Israel eight years ago claimed on the show "Vacuum" that, as they understood, they would not be allowed to move to Israel unless they agreed to the Depo-Provera shots.

"We said we won't have the shot," recounted one of the women, according to Haaretz. "They told us, if you don't you won't go to Israel. And also you won't be allowed into the Joint (American Joint Distribution Committee) office, you won't get aid or medical care. We were afraid ... We didn't have a choice. Without them and their aid we couldn't leave there. So we accepted the injection. It was only with their permission that we were allowed to leave."

Some of the women didn't know the shots contained contraceptives, the Times of Israel added, but instead thought they were vaccinations. Others said they kept receiving the shots once in Israel, even after reporting side effects such as headaches and abdominal pains.

Efrat Yardai explains in an op-ed for Haaretz that Depo-Provera is an extremely intrusive drug and is usually prescribed for "women who are institutionalized or developmentally disabled."

"Depo-Provera has a shameful history," he writes.

According to a report by the Isha L'Isha organization, the injections were given to women between 1967 and 1978 as part of an experiment that took place in the U.S. state of Georgia on 13,000 impoverished women, half of whom were black. Many of them were unaware that the injections were part of an experiment being conducted on their bodies. Some of the women became sick and a few even died during the experiment.

According to The Independent, nearly 100,000 Ethiopian Jews have moved to Israel since the 1980s, when the first airlifts brought Jews from Ethiopia to Israel. Yet the group has been met with skepticism in Israel society, and is often discriminated against. Many Ethiopian Jews have spent time in transit camps or were forced to live in absorption centers in Israel to "adjust to society." They face widespread discrimination in the job market and the educational system.

"This is about reducing the number of births in a community that is black and mostly poor," Hevda Eyal, author of the report "By Women to Women," told The National, referring to the birth control shots.

According to a 2010 report, a majority of the prescriptions of Depo-Provera written by Israeli doctors over the past few years were for Ethiopian women. "Figures show that 57 percent of Depo Provera users in Israel are Ethiopian, even though the community accounts for less than two percent of the total population," The National explains.

The Times of Israel details a nurse -- captured by a hidden camera in a health clinic -- telling an Ethiopian woman that the shot is given to Ethiopian immigrants because, "they forget, they don’t understand, and it’s hard to explain to them, so it’s best that they receive a shot once every three months … basically they don’t understand anything."

http://www.huffingto..._n_2567016.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no problem with this policy. The world is over populated. Governments should exponentially increase the use of this drug all over the world, particularly in Africa and Asia.

Out of curiosity I've looked into these types of birth control measures in the past. There is nothing publicly known that lasts more than a few months. Only if there was a drug that would last several years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You said it very well, Wetcoaster.

Was this program exclusive to Ethiopian women who wished to live in Israel?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Compulsory sterilization programs are government policies which attempt to force people to undergo surgical sterilization. In the first half of the twentieth century, many such programs were instituted in countries around the world, usually as part of eugenics programs intended to prevent the reproduction and multiplication of members of the population considered to be carriers of defective genetic traits.

Forced sterilization has been recognised as crime against humanity if the action is part of a widespread or systematic practice by the Rome Statute Explanatory Memorandum, which defines the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court.[1][2]

Canada

Although far less well-known than the Nazi eugenics and American eugenic sterilization programs, two Canadian provinces (Alberta and British Columbia) performed compulsory sterilization programs with eugenic aims. Canadian compulsory sterilization operated via the same overall mechanisms of institutionalization, judgement, and surgery as the American system. One notable difference is in the treatment of non-insane criminals. Canadian legislation never allowed for punitive sterilization of inmates.

Alberta

The most successful sterilization program in Canadian history was afforded via the passing of the Alberta Sexual Sterilization Act of 1928. From the years 1928 to 1972, sterilizations, both compulsory and optional, were performed on nearly 3000 “unfit” individuals of varying ages and ethnicities. In total, over 2800 procedures were performed. Initially, the act only provisioned sterilizations where consent was given by the subject or legal guardian of the subject, depending on the competency of the individual scheduled to undergo the operation. The 1937 amendment to the act allowed for sterilizations to be carried out without consent in the case of those deemed mentally defective. Sterilization of individuals deemed mentally ill still required consent. At the end of World War II, while other eugenic sterilization programs were being phased out, Alberta continued on, even increasing the scope of eligibility for sterilizations. They continued until 1972, when approximately 50 persons were operated upon.

Targeted sterilization

Youths, minorities, and women were sterilized in disproportionately high numbers. Minors, because of their legal dependency on adults, were almost always assigned as “mental defectives”, thus bypassing the parental consent requirement. Albertan Aboriginal people and Métis, regardless of age, were also targeted. Aboriginal people represented only 2.5% of the general population in Alberta, but made up 6% of the institutionalized population. Towards the end of Alberta’s sterilization program, Aboriginal people and Métis made up 25% of the sterilizations performed. Furthermore, those of Aboriginal ancestry were disproportionately assigned the “mentally deficient” rating, which denied them their legal rights and made them eligible for sterilization without consent. Women, particularly women who were young, poor, and unmarried, were also disproportionately represented; they were thought to be at high risk for prostitution or at the very least promiscuity, activities suspected of breeding further immorality. While it was conceded that sterilization would not change the behavior of these women, it would prevent them from bearing similarly defective progeny.

Aftermath

Despite the inaccuracy of IQ testing and tremendous grey area in classifying the mentally defective, nearly 3000 people were rendered sterile by the Sexual Sterilization Act. The true nature of the act was revealed when Leilani Muir, a former inmate of the Michener Centre (also known as the Provincial Training School for Mental Defectives, PTS), discovered in 1971 that she had been sterilized. After being admitted to the PTS at age 10 as an unwanted and abused child, Leilani was given a substandard education. She was inaccurately designated a mentally defective moron (an individual with an IQ between 51 and 70), effectively nullifying her human rights. She was administered powerful antipsychotic agents without any due cause, as she had not manifested any symptoms of psychosis during her residency at the PTS. Eventually she was given an impromptu IQ test, on which she scored a 64. Shortly thereafter, she was taken before the Eugenics Board, and sterilization was authorized pending her mother’s consent (which was readily given).

In 1995, Leilani was awarded $750,000CAD and $230,000CAD in damages for her wrongful and humiliating labeling as a moron and her subsequent sterilization. Since the victory, another 1300 cases have been opened, several of them concerning individuals who may have actual mental disabilities. It is unlikely they will be awarded any settlements based on stigmatization, but they may win suits based on involuntary sterilization, which is now considered battery under Canadian law.

British Columbia

As in other jurisdictions in the early 20th century, prejudice against physical and mental disability, and concern over societal costs of caring for the disabled, existed in British Columbia. The devaluing and eventual enmity to disabled life popularized rapidly, and spread from disabled children to disabled adults.

Additionally, the substantial immigration rate of the 1910s and 1920s spurred a feeling of xenophobia among the Protestant, educated elite of British Columbia. Slavic immigrants in particular were accused of having very high incidence of undesired characteristics, which are now generally attributed to culture shock and language barriers. The aversion to “abnormal” or “strange” people coupled with the perceived societal drain caused by immigrants, the deformed, mentally ill, and mentally disabled created an environment conducive to the enactment of a sexual sterilization act.

Thus, in July 1933, five years after Alberta, British Columbia passed its own sexual sterilization act. A three member Eugenics Board comprised of a psychiatrist, a social worker, and a judge was given the duty of authorizing the sterilization of any institutionalized person who was deemed capable of propagating undesirable social characteristics. Since such social problems as criminality, prostitution, and addiction/alcoholism were believed to have a biological (and thus heritable) cause, almost any institutionalized individual could be found eligible. Although the records concerning BC’s Sexual Sterilization Act have since been lost or destroyed, it is thought that ‘only’ a few hundred individuals were operated upon before the law was silently repealed in 1973.

Canadian sterilization laws were only enacted in Alberta and British Columbia, which could be attributed[who?] to their Protestant denominations. Pope Pius XI of the Roman Catholic Church denounced surgical intervention in reproductive matters, making the more Catholic regions (such as Ontario, Quebec, or the Maritime provinces) an inhospitable place to lobby for eugenic sterilization of the disabled. The introduction of progressive, left-leaning governments in Alberta[citation needed] and B.C. also had a hand in strengthening eugenic legislation. Left-leaning parties were eager to embrace new ideas, especially those that held a promise of economic turnaround.

Aftermath

After seeing a precedent set by Leilani Muir in her successful legal action against the government of Alberta, the British Columbia Public Guardian and Trustee filed similar lawsuits to protect the legal rights of the sterilized disabled. Thus far, 18 lawsuits have been filed against the government of British Columbia regarding the sterilization act. The suits allege that the sterilizations were involuntary, non-therapeutic, and that they were done for the convenience of the hospital. These lawsuits were filed in 2001, and since, several of the plaintiffs have died. In 2003, the cases were dismissed. Early in 2005, however, that judgement was overturned by the British Columbia Court of Appeal. In December 2005, nine sterilized women were awarded compensation in an out-of-court settlement, totalling $450,000CDN ($50,000CDN per plaintiff).

Beyond Alberta and British Columbia

Although eugenic sterilization was never instituted in Ontario, the issue saw considerable debate concurrent with the enactment of sterilization laws in Alberta and British Columbia. The formation of the Eugenics Society of Canada (ESC) in 1930 sought to organize supporters of eugenics into a coherent group in order to make their lobbying of the government more effective. Founded in Ontario, the ESC boasted a large number of physicians in its ranks, including Clarence Hincks, one of the most devoted proponents of the Alberta Sexual Sterilization Act. Other notable members included the Lieutenant-Governor of Ontario, Dr. H. A. Bruce, and eminent psychiatrist Clarence B. Farrar, who had been head of the Toronto Psychiatric Hospital since 1925. As social traits like criminality and promiscuity began to edge off the list of heritable traits, the ESC found itself adapting its strategy to that of birth control, while maintaining a focus on economic benefit. It garnered considerable support, but was never able to table eugenic sterilization effectively in the political arena. The ESC met its end shortly after a public relations blunder in 1938, when a representative implied the ESC and the Nazi party sought to achieve similar goals through similar means. It is not surprising then, that when World War II broke out in 1939, the ESC lost nearly all of its support.

Recent court discussions in Manitoba have investigated the legality and ethical permissibility of involuntary sterilization of the mentally disabled. Focusing on those individuals found legally incompetent, the 1990 and 1992 reports outlined the scenarios where an involuntary sterilization could be warranted. As stated by the 1990 discussion, three conditions are necessary for an individual to undergo any medical procedure.

  • The individual must be informed of both the nature, and risks/benefits of the procedure.

  • The consent must be voluntary, not the product of coercion, threat, or fraud.

  • The individual must be competent enough to give the above consent.

Individuals who are legally incompetent include minors and sufficiently-disabled adults.

The discussion reached a consensus that involuntary sterilization (or sterilization with substituted consent) is only permissible if it has an explicit positive effect on the physical or mental health of the individual: this is called therapeutic sterilization. One such case involved was a seriously disabled girl with an aversive phobia to blood, who was scheduled to undergo a hysterectomy. The rationale of the surgery was not eugenic, but rather to protect the girl from the direct mental trauma that would likely arise upon initiation of menses. This judgement was seen to be on the very threshold between therapeutic and nontherapeutic surgical intervention.

This discussion also cites a landmark case in substituted consent known as the Mrs. E. vs. Eve case. In it, a mother, “Mrs. E.”, wished to have her moderately intellectually disabled daughter “Eve” sterilized to save her the emotional distress potentially caused by pregnancy and childbirth. Additionally, it was argued that Eve would neither be capable of using any other method of contraception, nor caring for a child should she become pregnant. Since the sterilization was not explicitly therapeutic and carried grave physical harm and an intrusion on Eve’s rights, Mrs. E. could not be given the authority to have her daughter sterilized. It was then explored whether or not the government itself could make the decision, using parens patriae jurisdiction. Parens patriae allows the government to make authorizations in the “best interests” where no other source of consent can be attained; this includes children and mentally disabled persons. In the Eve case, the risks were deemed too high and the benefits too obscure to authorize a nontherapeutic sterilization via parens patriae jurisdiction, since a surgical sterilization is an irreversible procedure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It may be slightly more humane than instructing the midwives to kill every male child born, but still...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no problem with this policy. The world is over populated. Governments should exponentially increase the use of this drug all over the world, particularly in Africa and Asia.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If anybody else did this, even a black majority country, they would have been labelled racist a long time ago.

Anyways I get the impression that Israeli society is actually quite internally divided, and that it changed for the worst from the time they started recieving a lot of ex-Soviet immigrants in the '80's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You said it very well, Wetcoaster.

Was this program exclusive to Ethiopian women who wished to live in Israel?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing is Israel doesn't want African blacks to come to Israel and have 10 kids per couple. It would be a huge burden on the state in the present and future. I expect the govt to deny this practice but have no doubt they use these types of tactics to keep Israel Euro-Jewish.

Potential African Immigrants have a clear choice according to the report. If they don't want to take this injection they don't get to move to Israel.

The thing is this drug only works for a few months before another injection is required. This drug doesn't really achieve Israel's goals.

There is plenty of proof that Intl aid agencies use false vaccination programs to distribute these types of drugs to try and control population growth in Africa, Asia and South America.

WHO was supposedly distributing sterilization drugs in tetanus vaccines in the Philippines, BBC did a report on it.

IMO we need more aggressive programs like these. Our tiny little planet can not sustain such a huge human population.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing is Israel doesn't want African blacks to come to Israel and have 10 kids per couple. It would be a huge burden on the state in the present and future. I expect the govt to deny this practice but have no doubt they use these types of tactics to keep Israel Euro-Jewish.

Potential African Immigrants have a clear choice according to the report. If they don't want to take this injection they don't get to move to Israel.

The thing is this drug only works for a few months before another injection is required. This drug doesn't really achieve Israel's goals.

There is plenty of proof that Intl aid agencies use false vaccination programs to distribute these types of drugs to try and control population growth in Africa, Asia and South America.

The problem is it's not aggressive enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing is Israel doesn't want African blacks to come to Israel and have 10 kids per couple. It would be a huge burden on the state in the present and future. I expect the govt to deny this practice but have no doubt they use these types of tactics to keep Israel Euro-Jewish.

Potential African Immigrants have a clear choice according to the report. If they don't want to take this injection they don't get to move to Israel. Take your pick, whats the problem.

There is plenty of proof that Intl aid agencies use false vaccination programs to distribute these types of drugs to try and control population growth in Africa, Asia and South America.

The problem is it's not aggressive enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If keeping Israel relative "white" were the case, then you'd think they'd act similarily toward the 20% of their population that are Arab.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No doubt Muslim population growth in Israel is a big worry for Jews. Muslims reproduce at far greater rate than Jews.

The difference is two fold. One, Palestinians are well educated on these types of plots. Second, Palestinians are already living in Israel as they have been for over a thousand years, well before Palestine's name was changed to Israel in 1947. They do not need to agree to take these injections in order to come to Israel.

But I would not be surprised at all if Israel has some sorts of plans to counter these population trends. White South Africa during Apartheid did scientific research on ways to make Black women infertile. I'm sure other govt's have done studies to achieve similar goals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No doubt Muslim population growth in Israel is a big worry for Jews. Muslims reproduce at far greater rate than Jews.

The difference is two fold. One, Palestinians are well educated on these types of plots. Second, Palestinians are already living in Israel as they have been for over a thousand years, well before Palestine's name was changed to Israel in 1947. They do not need to agree to take these injections in order to come to Israel.

But I would not be surprised at all if Israel has some sorts of plans to counter these population trends. White South Africa during Apartheid did scientific research on ways to make Black women infertile. I'm sure other govt's have done studies to achieve similar goals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What? Which part of my post is racist? I'll quote the post you responded to, please point out or high light the part that comes across as racist to you. Thax.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The point is it is unlawful to make Depo-Provera injections a condtion for any Jewish woman to immigrate to Israel under the Law of Return.

It would be a criminal offence, an illegal action under the Law of Return and a civil assault.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The point is it is unlawful to make Depo-Provera injections a condtion for any Jewish woman to immigrate to Israel under the Law of Return.

It would be a criminal offence, an illegal action under the Law of Return and a civil assault.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i was asking generally on all the posts you had written trying to justify forced sterilization based on race.

perhaps i quoted the wrong one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah. And I'd add that doing it to the case of an Ethiopian women for her best interest is no exception to the rule. That's the part where you wonder if this was racist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.